Note: Descriptions are shown in the official language in which they were submitted.
CA 02130072 2002-02-13
This invention relates to a method of detecting a
pathogen using a virus.
More specifically, the invention relates to the detection
of the pathogen Brucella abortus using the virus Brucella
bacteriophage.
Brucellosis is a disease caused by the bacterial genus,
Brucella, named after Dr. David Bruce who discovered the
organism in 1887. The disease is zoonotic, although different
species are usually found in specific domestic animals, such
as cattle (B. abortus), swine (B. suis), sheep (B. ovis),
goats (B. melitensis) and dogs (B. cams) . The manifestations
of these bacteria in animals are usually reproductive
complications (aborted fetuses, inflamed uterus or orchitis).
While vaccinations in animals have proven partially effective
in offering protection, the vaccines are pathogenic for other
animals and humans. Infection is passed to humans through the
ingestion of milk, milk products, the handling of contaminated
carcases or aborted fetuses, and by the contact of infected
tissues or body fluids. The disease is rarely passed from
human to human, and then usually by exposure to contaminated
blood specimens. Brucella is the number one cause of
laboratory acquired infection. The great majority of patients
with the disease survive, but only a small percentage ever
recover completely. Usually the people infected are subject
to relapses of recurrent, or undulant, fever, incapacitation,
nausea and arthritis.
Brucella is a highly infective organism which causes
debilitating symptoms, and which can persist in the
1
~13~~~2
environment for months under the right conditions. There are
no effective vaccines and only limited therapeutic recourses
to the bacteria. In other words, Brucella is potentially a
bacterial warfare agent. Accordingly, there is a need for an
effective detection assay.
Methods are available for the detection of
pathogenic bacteria, but these have limitations. Culturing
bacteria from clinical specimens is sensitive but often
requires selective media, several days of incubation and the
right nutrients or conditions (Brucella needs 5-10~ carbon
dioxide). Common serological techniques are usually
insensitive. The enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay is usually
rapid, sensitive and specific but gives false-positive for
Staphylococcus aureus protein A, requires a source of
antibodies which is difficult to raise, and may not detect
different strains of the same species.
The object of the present invention is to meet the
above defined need for an effective detection assay for
Brucella (specifically Brucella abortus) in the form of an
assay for the detection of pathogenic bacteria by using
bacteriophages, a type of virus that is specific for host
bacteria.
Accordingly, the present invention relates to a
method of detecting the presence of a pathogenic bacteria in a
liquid sample using a bacteriophage specific to the bacteria
comprising the steps of producing a bacteriophage stock;
conjugating the bacteriophage stock to an enzyme; mixing the
conjugated bacteriophage with a sample suspected of containing
2
2~300'l2
the bacteria; and detecting any changes resulting from a
reaction of the conjugated bacteXiophage with the bacteria.
More specifically, the invention relates to a method
of detecting the presence of the bacteria Brucella abortus in
a sample using virus Brucella comprising the steps of
producing a stock of Brucella bacteriophage, conjugating the
Brucella bacteriophage to the enzyme urease; mixing the
conjugated Brucella bacteriophage with a sample suspected of
containing the bacteria Brucella abortus; and detecting any
changes resulting from a reaction of the conjugated Brucella
bacteriophage with the Brucella abortus.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
(1) Bacteria and bacteriophages: Brucella abortus 30, B.
abortus 2308, B. melitensis 15M, B. suis 144 and
bacteriophages WB1 (Webridge) and BK (Berkeley) were acquired
from Agriculture Canada, Animal Diseases Research Institute
(ADRI-Nepean), Nepean, Ontario, Francisella tularensis LVS was
acquired from Dr. F. Jackson, Dept. Medical Bacteriol.,
University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, who in turn acquired
it from the American Type Culture Collection. Escherichia
coli 1511 was acquired from the Dept. Microbiology &
Infectious Diseases, University of Calgary at Calgary,
Alberta.
(2) Antibodies: To compare methods of conjugating enzymes to
other proteins, antibodies were used as the other protein.
Mouse anti-Brucella abortus antisera were raised by immunizing
mice (100 ug smooth-lipopolysaccharide/0.2 ml/mouse, given on
weeks 0, 1, 5 at two sites intramuscular (i.m.) in the thigh
3
CA 02130072 2002-02-13
and two sites subcutaneous (s. c.) under the skin on the back,
blood taken by heart puncture on week 5, sera removed and
pooled). Mouse monoclonal antibody Ys-T9-2 (3 mg antibody/ml
ascites fluid) was acquired from D.R. Bundle of the National
Research Council of Canada. Mouse anti-bacteriophage WB1
antisera were raised by immunization with 0.2 ug
bacteriophage/0.2 ml/mouse [in a partially purified
preparation that has 1.2 X 109 plaque forming units, 1 ug
bacteriophage protein, and 160 ug total protein (growth medium
proteins, Brucella abortus lysate debris also present) per
ml] given on weeks 0, 1 and 2 both i.m. and s.c. as before,
blood was taken on week 3 and the sera removed and pooled.
Urease conjugated anti-mouse IgG goat antiserum was from the
Sigma Chemical Co. (St. Louis, Missouri).
(3) Antigens: Brucella abortus 2308 and B. melitensis 16M
were grown in Brucella broth (under an atmosphere with a 5%
C0~), Escherichia coli 1511 was grown in nutrient broth, and E.
tularensis LVS was grown in Chamberlain's synthetic broth.
The cells were killed with 2.0% phenol, removed by
centrifugation, tested for sterility, washed in saline, then
dispensed into vials so that after lyophilization there was 10
mg/vial.
(4) Chemicals: Urease (type VII), urea substrate tablets and
bromcresol purple indicator tablets were obtained from the
Sigma Chem. Co., Cesium chloride was obtained from Boehringer
Mannheim GmbH, West Germany, and m-maleimidobenzoyl-N-
hydroxysuccinimide (MBS) was obtained from Pierce Chemical
Co., Rockford, Illinois.
4
230072
Brucella abortus Bacteriophage Preparations
Bacteriophages WB1 (Weybridge) and BK (Berkeley)
were initially diluted 104 and 103 RTD (routine test dilution,
highest dilution producing lysis on the propagating strain).
Of the Brucella species and strains tested with both
bacteriophages, B. abortus 30 was the most sensitive (i.e. the
best propagating host) to the bacteriophages, and WB1 appeared
more lytic than BR. Bacterial cells grown on agar plates for
a day did not appear to be lyzed by a bacteriophage inoculum.
Plates that were freshly inoculated with B. abortus 30 (a
suspension that gave an O.D.~o of 0.1 and 109 bacteria, a 1:100
dilution of this was made and 0.1 ml of the latter was plated
onto Brucella agar plate with crystal violet), then with 103
plaque forming units (PFU), and incubated at 37°C, 5$ C02,
showed extensive lysis. Small colonies of resistant bacteria
(likely lysogenic) had to be removed. The plaques were cut
and removed aseptically with an inoculating needle, placed in
50 ml sterile saline in a 250 ml flask, agitate (150 rpm., 1
h, 37°C), and the liquid was filtered through a 0.22 um
filter.
(a) In the first two attempts to produce a
bacteriophage stock, the above described bacteriophage
filtrate was simply added to early cultures of B. abortus 30
(10$ bacteria in 2 litres of Brucella broth in a 6 litre flask,
16 h, 37°C, 5~ COZ, 150 rpm). The culture was shaken for 24
hours. The bacteria.were removed by centrifugation and the
supernatant was filtered through a 0.45 um filter (changing
5
~1J~~?~
after every 250 ml volume). The yield was 3.2 x 107 PFU of
bacteriophage/ml in 1200 ml.
240 ml (one-fifth of supernatant) of 34% w/v)
Carbowax - PEG 6000, 1% dextran sulfate (w/v) 7.5% NaCl (w/v)
was added to 1200 ml of culture supernatant to concentrate the
phages. The solution was gently mixed and stored overnight at
4°C. Most of the supernatant was poured off, but the bottom
300 ml Was centrifuged at 12,000 x g, 4°C for 15 min. The top
layer was removed, and to the bottom layer solid KC1 was
slowly added to make a 1 M solution. This was chilled for 30
min on ice, centrifuged at 12,000 x g, 4°C for 15 min. and
this time the supernatant was kept. The supernatant was
dialysed against saline, and ultracentrifuge overnight at
100,000 x g at 4°C. The supernatant was gently removed, and
the tubes were rinsed vigorously with saline. The yield was
5.4 X 108 PFU of bacteriophages/ml in 10 ml.
(b) In the next 2 attempts, 20 h cultures of B.
abortus 30 were centrifuged (Level 3 containment procedures
used), the cells were resuspended in 50 ml of a buffer (0.58%
NaCl, 0.2% MgS04.7H20, 50 mM TRIS-HC1, pH 7.5) which enhanced
attachment and infection of the bacteria, the 50 ml
bacteriophage preparation was added (incubation was 1 h, 37°C,
150 rpm), and the bacteria-bacteriophage mixture was added to
2 litres of fresh broth. After another 24 h at 37°C and 150
rpm, the culture was left static for 24 h. The cells were
removed by centrifugation and filtration as before. The yield
was 5 X 107 PFU of bacteriophage/ml in 1700 ml.
6
CA 02130072 2002-02-13
In order to concentrate the bacteriophage, the above
filtrate was lyophilized, and the solid was redissolved in 40
ml distilled water and then dialysed saline. The yield was
1.2 X 10~ PFU of bacteriophage/ml in about 50 ml.
In order to purify the phage, a CsCl step gradient was
made with 3.5 ml of A (56.24 g CsCl + 43.76 ml water, density
1.7), 2.5 ml of B (45.41 g CsCl + 54.59 ml water, density
1.5), 2.5 ml of C (31.24 g CsCl + 68.76 ml water, density
1.3), 2 ml of sample, and a topping layer of mineral oil, all
in ultra-clear centrifuge tubes for an SW-27 rotor (swinging
bucket). Centrifugation was for 2 h at 4°C and 24,000 rpm.
The tubes were then removed, the bottoms were pierced with a
26 gauge needle, and 1 ml fractions were removed. Each
fraction was read at an A28~nm, and the first peak (resting on
the CsCl B layer) was phage.
Conjugation of Enzymes to Proteins
(a) The one-step glutaraldehyde method: (This technique
follows that of Avrameas et al., 1978.)
(1) 3 mg of antibody or bacteriophage is mixed with 10 mg of
urease in 1 ml of 0.1 M sodium phosphate buffer, PB (pH 6.8)
(2) 0.1 ml of 1% glutaraldehyde is slowly added while the
mixture is stirring. Stir for an additional 5 minutes and
then let sit at room temp (22°C) for 3 h.
(3) Add 0.1 ml of 1 M lysine at pH 7 to the solution and let
it sit at room temp for 2 h.
(4) Dialyze the mixture against 0.01 M phosphate, 0.850 NaCl,
pH 7 phosphate buffer saline (PBS).
7
~1~00'~~
(5) Centrifuge at 40,000 x g, 4°C for 20 min to remove
debris.
(6) Filter through a 0.22 um membrane, add an equal volume of
glycerol for stability and store at 4°C.
(b) The two-step glutaraldehyde method: (This
technique follows that of Avrameas and Ternynck, 1971)
(1) 10 mg of urease is dissolved in 0.2 ml of 1.25~k
glutaraldehyde in PB. The solution is incubated for 18 h at
22°C. Excess glutaraldehyde is removed by dialysis or gel
filtration. Make to 1 ml final volume.
(2) Dialyze against 0.1 M sodium carbonate buffer (pH 9.5).
(3) Add 0.5 mg of antibody or bacteriophage/0.1 ml saline to
the urease solution (make sure pH is above 9). Incubate 24 h
at 4°C.
(4) Add 0.1 ml of 0.2 M ethanolamine and incubate for 2 h at
4°C.
(c) The MBS (m-maleimidobenzoyl-N-hydroxysuccini-
mide) method: (This technique follows that of Healey et al.,
1983)
(1) Dimethylformamide was dried over Sephadex beads. 25 mg
(8mM) of MBS was added to the dimethylformamide. 0.1 ml of
this was added to 3 mg antibody or bacteriophage in 0.4 ml of
PBS. Incubation was for 30 min at 22°C, with continuous
gentle swirling.
(2) Unreacted MBS was removed by gel filtration or dialysis.
(3) 6 mg of urease was added, then incubated 2 h at 22°C,
with swirling.
8
CA 02130072 2002-02-13
(4) 2-mercaptoethanol was added to a final concentration of 2
mM (i.e. 0.1 ml of a 1:100 dilution), and incubation was for
30 min at 22°C, with swirling.
(5) The mixture was dialysed against PBS, filtered through a
0.22 um membrane, an equal volume of glycerol was added, and
the mixture was stored at 4°C.
The Enzyme-Linked Viral Assay (ELVirA)
(a) The Direct Methods
(1) 200 u1 of bacterial dilutions (50, 10 and 2 ug/ml in 0.06
M carbonate buffer, pH 9.6) were applied to wells of a
MaxiSorp Immuno-plate (trade-mark of Nunc InterMed, Denmark).
The plate was incubated for 1 h at 37°C.
(2) The microtiter plate was washed 5 times in wash buffer
[0.01 M sodium phosphate, 0.85% NaCl (or PBS), 0.05% Tween
(trademark), 0.1% bovine serum albumin (BSA), pH 7].
(3) 300 u1 of blocking buffer (0.01% Tween, 2% BSA, in PBS)
was added to each well, and incubation was for 1 h at 37°C.
(4) The plate was washed 5 times as before.
(5) Because of limited amounts of bacteriophage, a 1 ug
concentration was used for the MBS protocol and 200 u1 of the
urease-conjugated bacteriophage was used without dilution onto
the plate. Incubation was for 1 h at 37°C.
(6) The plate was washed 5 times in triple-distilled water.
(7) 200 u1 of urease substrate was added, incubated at 37°C,
and read every 10 min. The reaction can be followed either by
the increase of absorbance at 595nm, or the decrease of
absorbance at 405 nm.
(b) The Indirect (Sandwich) Method:
9
CA 02130072 2002-02-13
(1) 200 u1 of bacterial dilutions were added to the wells,
incubated and washed as above.
(2) 300 u1 of blocking buffer was added to the wells,
incubated and washed.
(3) 200 u1 of a bacteriophage preparation (1 ug/ml PBS) were
added, incubated and washed.
(4) 200 u1 of a 1:5 dilution of anti-bacteriophage mouse
antiserum were added, incubated and washed.
(5) 200 u1 of a 1:500 dilution of anti-mouse IgG goat urease-
conjugated antiserum was added, incubated and washed.
(6) Urease substrate was added. The reaction required 4 h at
37°C before it could be read at 595nm.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
At first glance, it would appear that antibodies and
bacteriophages have very little in common. Antibodies are
proteins (e. g. for IgG, two heavy and two light chains linked
with sulfhydryl bonds, molecular weight around 160,000) raised
by lymphocytes as part of the body's immune defense.
Bacteriophages are viruses (molecular weight over
1,000,000,000) that are made of protein encapsulated nucleic
acids and that replicate within bacterial hosts. However,
both may interact with a bacterium, the first as part of the
body's defence against infection, the latter as a means of
replication. Hence several similarities can be seen:
10
X130072
Antibody Bacteriophage
-made of protein -has a protein coat
-attaches to antigens (unique -attaches to a receptor
sequence of compounds) on the (unique sequence of
bacterial surface compounds) on the bacterial
surface
-has 2 binding sites called -has a binding site called
the "variable region" the "base plate"
-specificity and binding -specificity and binding
affinity may vary as in the affinity may vary with
case of different monoclonal different phages to the same
antibodies to the same bacterial host
antigen
It is a result of these similarities that the
inventors developed a novel detection system that replaced an
antibody with a bacteriophage.
As mentioned above, two bacteriophages, WB1
(Weybridge) and BK (Berkeley) were acquired from Agriculture
Canada, ADRI (Nepean). Upon testing these against a few stock
cultures of Brucella, it was found they were lytic for B.
abortus 30, B. suis 144, weakly for B. abortus 2308, and
apparently not lytic for B. melitensis 16M. The WB1
bacteriophage appeared to be more lyti.c than the BK
bacteriophage. The ELVirA does not depend on lysis of the
bacterial host by a bacteriophage. Indeed, some
bacteriophages may not be able to infect, replicate or lyse
their host (e.g., for the latter, Phi-X does not lyze its E.
coli host but.extrudes its progeny from the living cell) but
may still attach sufficiently to give a positive ELVirA
reading. The reason the inventors focused on a sensitive
bacterial host (B. abortus 30) and lytic bacteriophage (WB1)
was so that the latter's production and viability could be
quantitated by means of plaque forming units (PFU).
11
z~~oo~z
Two methods are described for the production of WBl.
The first method added the bacteriophage to a logarithmic
growth of bacteria, the latter added these to a concentrated
suspension of bacteria in a buffer that enhanced attachment.
Although the final yields were similar, 3.2 X 107 and 5 X 107
PFU/ml respectively, the cells for the latter had a digested
mucoid appearance and after centrifugation the supernatant had
a thicker consistency. It is likely that the latter method
was far superior for phage production but that filtration to
remove the pathogenic bacterium had resulted in loss of
phages. Table 1 illustrates examples of such losses. The
counts of eluded phages when the filtrate was diluted then
refiltered through a 0.22 um membrane are listed in Table 1.
Table 1
Plaque forming units of a WB1 suspension that was refiltered
through a 0.22 um membrane and plated onto B. abortus 30.
Fraction PFU
(0.1 ml)
1 146
2 129
3 44
4 26
5 3
6 3
7 0
8 0
It is evident that the phages in the preparation are
binding to the membrane, reducing its pore size and hence
12
2130072
restricting the number than can elute. Suggested ways by
which the yield of bacteriophage can be increased include:
- increase bacterial lysis (i.e. add enzymes such as
lysozyme shortly before phage harvest, heat stress the culture
at 42°C, test the use of mild detergents or low concentrations
of organic solvents, alter the pH) to liberate more phage.
- reduce the stickiness of the bacteriophage
preparation (i.e. the supernatant from centrifuged culture) by
the addition of enzymes (lysozyme, nucleases, lipases) before
filtration.
- sterilize the preparation without filtration (e. g.
0.3% chloroform, 0.5% phenol).
For the partial purification of WB1, both the
polyethylene glycol precipitation method and the
lyophilization-dialysis method were used to show that this can
be accomplished by more than one means and still have viable
bacteriophage. Other possible method for purification of
phage include ammonium sulfate precipitation or altering the
pH to a precipitation point.
For the final purification of WB1, a cesium chloride
step-gradient was used and the phage band was found on top of
the B layer (density 1.5). Cesium chloride is costly and the
procedure, although it is efficient (160-fold purification)
purifies only small amounts of phage in a time consuming
process.
Despite the preliminary stage of bacteriophage
purification, the inventors did produce sufficient~amounts for
13
t~fe indirect (sandwich) ELVirA. The test was severely limited
for:
- because the coating of the microtiter plate used a
stock of antigen prepared from B. abortus strain 2308, not
strain 30, it is likely from the above observation that WB1
would have poor affinity for this bacterium
- due to time constraints, mice were immunized with
a partially purified bacteriophage preparation (only 0.6$
pure)
- crude polyvalent sera and not purified antibodies
to WB1 were used.
Upon testing the assay (4 h at 37°C) the results
were as set out in Table 2.
Table 2
The Indirect (Sandwich) Enzyme-Linked Viral Assay
(ELVirA) using unconjugated WB1
Antigen "595nm
(50 ug/ml)
B. abortus 2308 4.000
B. melitensis 16M 0.485 ~ 0.068
F. tularensis LVS 1.066 ~ 0.054
E. coli 1511 0.194 ~ 0.046
Control (no bacteria) 0.124 ~ 0.004
That bacteriophage WB1 is specific for the "A"
antigen of B. abortus is evident by the strong reaction with
B. abortus 2308 but not B. melitensis 16M which has the "M"
14
~1300~2
antigen. There was a weak interaction with F. tularensis
(which was previously named Brucella tularensis) and this is
consistent with the inventors' observation that the two
organisms cross-react with antisera raised to the other. The
lack of reaction with E. coli or the control show that the
Indirect ELVirA can be used to detect pathogens.
For the Direct ELVirA, the 1 and 2-step
glutaraldehyde methods and the MBS method to show that more
than one conjugation technique is available for linking an
enzyme (in this case urease) to a bacteriophage. However, the
final results show that the tests do not give similar results.
The 2-step glutaraldehyde method produced an inactive
conjugate. Initially the 1-step glutaraldehyde method
appeared to form an inactive conjugate as well, but when it
was digested with lysozyme, RNase and DNase (each 20 ug/ml),
the conjugate gave a colour reaction in all wells. At the
time only partially purified bacteriophage WBl was used
Upon conjugating anti-Brucella monoclonal antibody
Ys-T9-2 by the various methods, the MBS procedure appeared
superior, and accordingly was applied to purified
bacteriophage WB1. The WB1 (1 ug/ml) was activated with MBS
and then reacted with urease. Upon testing for 30 min at
37°C, the results were as follows:
CA 02130072 2002-02-13
Table 3
Direct Enzyme-linked Viral Assay (ELVirA) using
urease conjugated WBl bacteriophage
Antigen A595nrn
( 5 ua/ml )
B. abortus 2308 2.344 ~ 0.310
B. melitensis 16M 1.280 ~ 0.155
F. tularensis LVS 1.627 ~ 0.104
E. coli 1511 1.701 ~ 0.060
control (no bacteria) 0.156 ~ 0.009
Table 3 shows that urease can be linked to a
bacteriophage and that the conjugate can be used in a
diagnostic assay.
16
